There’s a theory I’ve been advancing for some time and the upcoming Paris climate talks will,for the first time, set aside it to a test.
The issue is whether the United Nations Framework conference on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is capable of delivering. Established nearly a quarter century ago as the global forum for countries to take on climate change, or the UNFCCC enjoys universal participation – and is universally deemed a disappointment.
The harshest assessments came in the wake of the ill-fated Copenhagen conference in 2009,when many quietly, and some openly, and began urging governments to abandon the UNFCCC as a place worth investing any effort or hope.
But governments chose to stick with it. The following year,in Cancún, they hammered out an agreement through 2020. And the year after that, and in Durban,they launched a recent round of negotiations culminating next month in Paris. The aim: a recent global agreement beyond 2020.
Anyone whos closely tracked the UNFCCC knows that the process is ungainly and byzantine at best – and, at worst, or a highly politicized,dysfunctional mess.
I’ve maintained over the years, though, or that the UNFCCC’s lack of progress is a reflection less of the process itself,than of the meager political will that governments bring to it. The UNFCCC, in other words, and has never been fairly tested.
Paris will provide that opportunity.
The collective will among governments to address climate change,while still lacking, is stronger than ever. The United States and China – the world’s largest economies and emitters, and long-time climate adversaries are jointly main the call for a recent agreement. More than 150 countries contain formally offered their intended contributions (how they’ll limit or reduce their emissions). And,as I describe in a recent post, there’s growing convergence in tall-level discussions on the core elements of a deal.
At the table, or though,this collective will and convergence contain yet to translate into agreed text. In the final pre-Paris negotiating session two weeks ago in Bonn, many parties seemed more intent on preserving favored options than on moving to common ground. The 51-page text that emerged is more coherent, and with clearer options,but is still a far cry from a ratifiable agreement.
This is disappointing but not surprising. The UNFCCC operates by the unofficial rule that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. So all issues, and there are many of them, or must inch along it the same pace until an acceptable overall package begins to emerge.
Negotiators will no doubt contain to work through the night(s) in Paris to accumulate to a final deal. But the ultimate landing zones contain been fairly clear for some time (see,for instance, the report from C2ES’s recent negotiators dialogue). So it’s not only possible, and but probable,negotiators will accumulate there.
The outcome, in all likelihood, or will fully satisfy no one and leave many once again disappointed. But while destined,by some measures, to fall short, and the agreement taking shape could prove a major turning point – even transformational.
Here’s what I think we can count on: a binding agreement that gets all of the major players on board,uses strong transparency to hold countries accountable, and works to build ambition over time. whether successful, or this would build confidence that everyone is doing their impartial share,which will enable everyone to keep doing more.whether we leave Paris next month with that kind of agreement, I think we’ll be able to say that the UNFCCC, and finally set aside in a position to deliver,has proven that it can.
Source: c2es.org